Fish-Hawk.Net

I know this doesn't effect very many of you, but I feel since the canal and Dow's Lake is a virtual closed environment (from Hogs Back to the Ottawa River). It should be a strictly catch and release zone. This would maintain the food base for the other fish there; mainly bass.
I have notice the gradual decline of the size of the sunfish I've been catching there over the last five years, and I can only contribute it to the unrestricted harvesting of sunfish.
Just my humble opinion!
Feel free to comment.

i agree... Catch and Release ONLY... when i was a kid i had a hard time getting a bait down and not catching something... now i find myself looking for fish... the size and numbers have dropped dramatically...

JaY

well...have you seen after the ice melts and before they refill the canal ?
the amount of garbage is disgusting and I'm sure it's not conducive to a healthy fish population...

The other train of thought....

With minimal harvest of the panfish population, the pie (their forage) is split between way more fish than it should be. Thus resulting in a smaller average size. Lots of fish but they are stunted. I've been toying with them the past week and it really is a battle over my bait. The bait hits the water and litterally dozens pounce on it.

There is only so much food around, when the population of predators is high, you are likely to see smaller maximum and average sizes. This could be said for any species.

I think the #'s in a controlled environment such as D Lake is impacted by many factors.

The winter die off #'s are staggering, literally hundreds and hundreds of fish of all species die every year due to lowered water levels and oxygen depletion.
Secondly the structure of a man made lake as D lake is not ideal for spawning and many of the fish are coming down from up river.

Combine that with the harvesting of large #'s of fish and you have a recipe for low numbers and small fish.

Not sure exactly how D.lake would benifit from C&R but I can't see how it would hurt it.

I cant understand why some people are gung-ho on banning things. If there was some solid evidence that would support a ban thats one thing, but there is none.
I think the reason why there is lots of smaller fish may be because there is to many of them competing for food and they stay smaller, if the pannies were thinned out the result would likely be bigger pannies in the end so a ban might backfire on you big time.
Also it is not a closed system, fish come up and down the canal and locks to come and go from that lake so no.

TLunge wrote:I cant understand why some people are gung-ho on banning things. If there was some solid evidence that would support a ban thats one thing, but there is none.

Well, sometimes you do not need the research to tell you that getting hit with a bat in the head is a bad idea... you just know cause it's obvious...

The problem is, some people have different versions of what is obvious... to you, this "bat in the head" will not hurt unless proven, to others, they do not want to take the chance....

Hookup wrote:

TLunge wrote:I cant understand why some people are gung-ho on banning things. If there was some solid evidence that would support a ban thats one thing, but there is none.

Well, sometimes you do not need the research to tell you that getting hit with a bat in the head is a bad idea... you just know cause it's obvious...

The problem is, some people have different versions of what is obvious... to you, this "bat in the head" will not hurt unless proven, to others, they do not want to take the chance....

I vote for best analogy of the year....Now thats funny

Not funny cause it is directed at someone but just plain funny....

Ok...EWWWWW


I used to work @ 101 Colonel By. My office window over looked the canal and the park by the NAC....

I came into work one morning and the Ottawa Police had just dragged some poor soul out of the water.......

It sat there on the sidewalk covered with a Canadian Tire brand tarp for 3 hrs....before the ambulance came to take it away...

No disrespect to the gent that had died, but my boss told me this was the 3rd or 4th they'd pulled out of there since he worked there....2006!

So I do not wish to fish somewhere where there is probability of catching a corpse......BLECH!!!

Too funny Jamsers.....

Sad part is its true....

I saw the body!! I also saw that canal when it was drained...
GROSS!

I'd rather partake in a scat flick then fish that area....

Hey Jamsers, Vic.Isl. has good scenery but the canal is hard to beat sometimes??? It's not always about fishing!!!!!!!!!

My post wasn't meant at all to be a highjack . Pints and I are Vic. island buddies and he knows what I am talking about.

I smell a hijack

Hookup wrote:

TLunge wrote:I cant understand why some people are gung-ho on banning things. If there was some solid evidence that would support a ban thats one thing, but there is none.

Well, sometimes you do not need the research to tell you that getting hit with a bat in the head is a bad idea... you just know cause it's obvious...

The problem is, some people have different versions of what is obvious... to you, this "bat in the head" will not hurt unless proven, to others, they do not want to take the chance....

Your analogy makes no sense, what is happening in Dows that we cant take a chance on? What evidence have you got of anything that would support banning a fishery?

muskymatt wrote:I smell a hijack

dows lake the rideau canal what a joke fill it in !!!put in affordable housing for all those poor immigrants we bring in!!! let the glebe people off the hook build low rent housing at landsdowne park now this is a hijack